NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
What Thodorus Knows Plato discuss this of knowledge throughout his famous dialogue, th Thattus. H discuss many different ways of learning and attempts to did knowledge. Plato dos this through a conversation btwn a fw characters: Socrates, th famous philosophy; Thodorus, an agd find and philosophy of Socrates; and Thattus, a young man who is introduced to Socrates book a discussion. On act of knowledge which thy review is perception.
It is did and xplaind by Socrates, to th young and innocent Thattus. Shallowness, incompleteness, poor reasoning, and assertions with flimsy foundations prevent a truly enlightened person. When a person comes up with a philosophy or theory of his own, he persuades other people and influences them. Orators sway minds and hearts and thereby wage wars, gain control and seduce an unsuspecting public.
To illustrate this point, lets say a nobody comes out and questions the government and influences the rest of the public to do so, with enough questioning citizens the government will be overpowered by the overwhelming demand of inquiries and thus cause chaos in a country... Those who advocate total control or even economists philosophy like Carl Marx and his views on social reform can change the whole values of society, which means every single unit of society (us) will be affected even if we resist the next generation will grow up already brainwashed and in their minds that this is good, that is bad. This is why some people say philosophy is dangerous Perception is defined as the way things look to us, or the way they sound, feel, taste, or smell. It is not the way things are exactly, but the way we see them; or because it involves all of the five senses, the way we perceive them.
Perception is not restricted to sight only, the world has countless numbers of sounds, smells, and textures. Perception is the way things look to us because even though something might seem to be one way, it is another. For example, the Muller-Lyer illusion makes people see two lines of different lengths, while the lines are the same size. This illustrates the fact that just because you perceive something to be a certain way does not mean that it is true.
Truth and perception do not necessarily coincide. This is also true with belief. When seeing something that is too far fetched to be real, then you find it hard to believe. Perception is merely an experience [which] is just a stage along the causal process leading to belief. Perception is not truth or belief, but it is an important (however, not necessary) step to reaching them. In Plato's Theaetetus, the three characters in the conversation have a discussion on perception and how it relates to the world.
Plato recounts Socrates telling the young Theaetetus how, contrary to his belief, perception is not knowledge. Perception is too varied, Socrates says. He gives the example of a breeze blowing; one man can be made cold from the wind, while the man next to him might not be cold at all. The blowing wind is the same temperature, but as defined above, perception is the way things look to us. Everybody is different and so everybody will therefore experience the world in a different way. This is what Socrates explains to Theaetetus, who sparked the topic of conversation with his reply, knowledge is simply perception.
He was incorrect in his thinking because knowledge consists of justification, belief, and truth. Since two of these aspects are unattainable with perception alone, then perception can, in no way, be considered knowledge. Theaetetus quickly learns the error he has made and the dialogue and the examination of knowledge continues. When rating th Thattus, on should kp in mind th fact of Socrates' trial and date and th fact of Socrates' activity as midwife and physician of th soul.
Plato intends that th arguments of th Thattus b understood in th contact of Socrates' mission to ducat his follow Athenians vn to th last days of his lif. Th Socrates of th Thattus is, in many important ways, still th Socrates of th Apology -- a therapist of souls and a pure of fal's opinions, who knows that h dos not know and learn by helping othr popl to s for thmslvs. From an pistmological point of view, th Thattus sms inconclusive; th dialogue is aortic and th character Socrates is naming in native dialectic. But mor is at star in th Thattus than pistmology; thr is an undeniable trial drama taking plac. Socrates is find with date, and his companions ar find with confusion about priorities. In th Thattus, w s in court form th mathis of particulars and universal.
Knowledge and virtu ar not transcendent and apart from human affairs; thy tak plac in popl, who str (pyrosis) by mans of transcendent standards of th tru and th good. Socrates, until th pur spectator of th digression (last in th dialogue) and until th pragmatic "physician" of appearance - who mak's thos who fl bad fl good - genuinely parts th souls of his "patients" of th malady of bad idas so that thy will rally, not apparently, gt wll. At th sam tim, h is a "physician" of arguments, purging thm of words that do not blog and r arranging th words that do blog. The pursuit for the meaning of knowledge, a search the scholar Socrates had great difficulty achieving. He takes us into a world of questioning and makes us contemplate our thoughts of the particular concept on hand. In order to focus on the statements given to him, which were to defuse his drive of the question, he analyzed.
Analyzing brought upon a whole variety of methods, which in turn broke down the big question into countless smaller questions. Evidently the definitions given to him are disproved, a repeated scenario for young Theaetetus. Thus, Socrates explored human thought to a point only a few men in history have achieved and we can that this was an art he tried to teach Theaetetus and those who were interested. This is what must be proven; whether Socrates teachings were to alter the behavior of how the pupil sees knowledge or to just change the pupils knowledge. When Theaetetus presents his answer to the question of the moment, Socrates would then derive a statement, which would express his thoughts of the answer. The answer was integrated into the discussion and this was what Socrates would express whether the reply would fit into the equation of the current thought.
This was Socrates way, a natural occurrence in the dialogue, thus dealing with behavior and not an urge to correct young Theaetetus. In 154 d-e it becomes apparent when Theaetetus is asked a question in which hes response becomes vital to the discussion in terms of Theaetetus thoughts and continuation of the conversation (Socrates needs to blend the ideas together). To be fair and for arguments sake we must find some evidence pointing in the other direction to strengthen the view. There is to some degree a level of difficulty in Socrates teachings, which seem to do the opposite of his intentions. In 210 b, Socrates points out to Theaetetus that his definitions are not consistent- knowledge is neither perception nor true judgment, nor an account added to true judgment. Though, the theories were incorrect on defining knowledge, hasnt his sense of knowledge changed?
Not only is Theaetetus ideas and truths washed away but what of his knowledge of courage? He had what seemed to be an enthusiastic approach to difficulties, but what is to be of his ideals now? Hes a young boy and to be incorrect in every angle of the matter, there must be a change of ideals. Very clear of this is (in 165 d) when Theaetetus states how he has contradicted himself and Socrates points out that this has probably happened more than once. One should view this not negatively but more as evidence of Theaetetus trying to grasp new concepts. Nonetheless his beliefs are altered even if by Socrates standards this is acceptable in hopes of a better thinker.
On might ask if th got knows th Pythagoras there vn when h is not picturing it to himself. Similar refutations will mrg in subsequent discussion, including th problem of sing versus rambling. What Thattus has in mind is somthing lik Hraclitus's along, "I per things which can b sn, hard, and privy. " (Fragment 55) Th question of direct versus harry video, of grat important in courts of law, may, ironically, hav somthing to do with knowledge. Th Thattus its, as th prologue indicate, is its a harry account -- a harry account that may paradoxically name th harr or th read to s somthing for himself or half.
In any cas, Thattus dos not yt grasp th making of his own xpress; h is not "wis" about what h has land. H dos not yt radio that pur mathematical relations (which ar th tru objects of mathematical knowledge) ar spiral from court drawings, imag's, and constructions. So h dos not yt "s" that when h is sing gothic constructs with his ys, h is also -- mor importantly -- sing not forms with his mind. H is, in a sns, sing both sids of th david lin. His ambivalent at th juncture btwn sns perception and mathematical understanding is further complicated by th fact of certain popular Protagoran things, things which scorn xpress in mathematics. Thattus' read for Thodorus (a find of Pythagoras) and his youthful susceptibility to sophistic persuasion and public opinion tip th balance of th discussion toward understanding "perception" (which could also man th "I s" of sun insight) as sns-perception of court particulars.
Thattus, who should know that th content of mathematics is not subjective, lts th argument fall into th domain of subjectivity, unaware that sing since might b different from sing drawings. Being totally unbiased one can come up with a more rational viewpoint that corresponds to the original (stated in the beginning). Socrates obviously had no intent in demolishing the ideals of Theaetetus and replacing it with his own. Neither is there any evidence that this is what occurred. In fact, examples that Socrates gave not only were to help in illustrating the theory at hand, but as well as showing his frame of thought. Take in to account the example Socrates gives Theaetetus trying to describe if perception is what our senses know and if we know what they tell us is always understood?
He gives us the example of foreign language to explain in detail what hes trying to explain. Are we to say that Socrates is not trying to teach Theaetetus how to analyze? Is he not trying to show Theaetetus how to take better criticism of arguments displayed to him? This seems more like the objective Socrates wishes to accomplish with his young pupil. If we keep going down in the same section of the dialogue (163), Theaetetus gives a very in depth answer that in turn gives an implicit statement. The statement is simply that he feels hes in the same state of mind that Socrates is in.
Rather than taking pride, Socrates is impressed at Theaetetus conduct on the handling of the material (implied with very good indeed). Centering on the metaphor Socrates gives on the basis of his role in philosophy, a better understanding could be arrived at in determining teachings sought after. Socrates is skilled in the art of midwifery, not literally but he explains the comparisons. He helps men bring whats inside them, referring to there knowledge as a midwife does. This statement is not a concept an average man of his time would say, nonetheless he points that he means only to bring the best of a man-hes knowledge. One can say a midwife helps nurture and raise the child, as Socrates would want to comprehend, in which he helps nurture ideas as well as raise them.
Those thoughts, which cannot be used because of their inconsistency, are thought by him to be wind eggs, not discrediting the author of the thought. In more detail, he goes on to Theaetetus of the similarities, and quite generally he is only trying to bring men in to a realm better questioning there own beliefs. He wants to cleanse them of any favoritism or any other unjust ways of determining theories, ideas, etc, what he would want for them is for them to break them down for themselves. The pupils havent learned this art yet, but thats what Socrates feels he can help build in there thinking process. Thodorus and Thattus must not simply b told thy ar looking in th wrong plac (too low) for knowledge. This thy must s for thmslvs, with careful prodding from Socrates.
Th midwifery of Socrates, that licit's both insight and slf-improvement, shows onc again that for Plato knowledge is bound up with virtu and that th Thattus dialogue is both pistmological and trial. On could reasonably doubt that Plato vr "outer" Socrates. On cannot doubt that, at th nd of the conversation with Socrates, though knowledge has not bn "did, " Thodorus and Thattus ar improve mn who know mor and but what thy ar about. Bibliography: Boston, David. Plato's THEAETETUS. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988 Demos, Raphael.
The Philosophy of Plato. New York: Octagon Books, 1966 Gadamer, Hans Georg. Dialogue and Dialectic: Eight Hermeneutical Studies on Plato. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1980 Gauss, Hermann. Plato's Conception of Philosophy. New York: Haskell House Publishers, 1974
Free research essays on topics related to: perception, dialogue, plato, thy ar, socrates
Research essay sample on H Dos Not Yt Dos Not Yt Socrates
